News

Editorial for RUSI's World Defence Systems magazine summer 2003 (page 3)

Like all reinforcement for buildings, each security system or innovation needs to be tested to prove that it can resist real blast attacks. Too often specifications are written based on assumptions and calculations, which do not take into account actual empirical testing.

The next levels of security to be considered are the strength, viability and bomb resistance of the windows and doors. It is a fact that 90% of deaths and injuries in bomb attacks are caused from flying glass. If there is one area that needs special attention it is the glazing system that is used. Human beings need glass in buildings. It is not an option to remove glass totally from buildings. There are systems such as those, which have been developed by my company, which have been proven to resist the effects of explosions at close stand offs. Again it is essential for the procurement manager or consultant to adopt a system that has been empirically tested. Too often we see specifications based purely on glass thickness. Thick laminated glass will not save lives; I repeat, will not save lives, unless it is fitted within a bomb tested window or door system, which will hold the glass securely in position in an explosion with values of several atmospheres of pressure.

Many buildings managers ease their consciences by installing security film on conventional glass windows. Yes this is cheap, but it will only be effective well outside of the death zone. Consideration must be given to the design of the beading, to the method of how the glass is bedded in, and to the fixing of the frame to the building envelope.
The only conclusion to draw is that only field-tested products should be considered in all medium and high-risk areas. Bomb blast resistant glass does not exist in isolation from the framework structure and from the way it is fixed. Only glazing systems which have a proven track record can be trusted to enable the appropriate glass combination to do it’s work.